General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFor anyone who needs proof: "84% of Americans favor background checks..."
http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-content/misc/usapolls/us130304/guns/Complete%20March%2013,%202013%20USA%20McClatchy_Marist%20Poll%20Release%20and%20Tables.pdf 84% of Americans favor background checks for private gun sales and sales at gun
shows. 15% oppose the idea, and 2% are unsure. Even 81% of gun owners
nationally support such a measure. Registered voters mirror the overall population.
Regardless of political party, more than eight in ten favor background checks.
A majority of Americans -- 55% -- favor a ban on assault weapons. 41% oppose
such a ban, and 3% are unsure. A majority of gun owners -- 55% -- are against such
a measure. On this question, registered voters also reflect the views of Americans,
overall. There are partisan differences. 70% of Democrats and 54% of independents
support a ban on assault weapons while a slim majority of Republicans -- 51% --
oppose it.
When it comes to banning ammunition clips that hold more than ten bullets,
52% of adults nationally favor the measure. 45% oppose it, and 3% are unsure.
Looking at gun owners in the United States, nearly six in ten -- 59% -- are against the
proposal. Again, registered voters are in line with Americans, in general. When it
comes to party, 71% of Democrats favor such a measure. However, a majority of
Republicans -- 56% -- and 51% of independents oppose banning clips with more
than ten bullets.
Overwhelmingly, Americans -- 78% -- oppose reducing regulations on gun
purchases to make it easier to buy and own a gun. 19% favor this action, and 3%
are unsure. Even 70% of gun owners nationally oppose this idea. Here, too,
registered voters reflect the views of Americans as a whole. Regardless of party,
more than seven in ten voters are against easing regulations to purchase a gun.
Save this thread for the times when people ask you where such figures came from. It's right there. It's not myth. Even if the NRA crowd want to believe otherwise.
Llewlladdwr
(2,165 posts)If support was that strong there's no way this legislation wouldn't have passed.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)Llewlladdwr
(2,165 posts)How could that few people possibly be overriding the will of the other 310,000,000?
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Llewlladdwr
(2,165 posts)Are all of them helpless? If the Senators who opposed the gun bills voted on today were getting calls indicating 9 to 1 support from their constituants in favor of the legislation then it would have passed and the NRA would have been powerless.
New gun laws don't have the level of support some people think they do.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)That's not a slight on us but an admittance that the NRA is one of the most powerful institutions in the US.
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)It's one thing to give a quick answer. Another to be fully invested in government.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)Really.
But I've not paid any attention to the details of the polls being reported
I listened to Ed Schultz radio yesterday and he went on about polls showing 90% of America in favor of closing the gun-show/private sake loophole. And then he'd say but maybe Arkansas or Wyoming is 100% against that.
I thought, Ed, you know a 90% in a representative randomized sampling of all states would still produce a wide majority of states with populations in favor of always requiring background checks for transfer of ownership.
At the time it made me wonder if Ed was dense about the meaning of polls or if the polls were really that unscientific. I still don't know about the 90% number, but this poll looks like efforts were made for it to be representative of the whole country.
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)It's one thing to give a quick answer, and another to be invested. Most people are not watching news about the vote let alone writing their senators.
I also suspect that there is another poll out that asks non supporters if it will be a factor in their vote... sponsored by the NRA, and delivered to choice Senators.
silverweb
(16,402 posts)[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]Thanks!
KoKo
(84,711 posts)and the Corporate/Think Tank/K-Street Funded US House and Senate. They are so BOLD AND FLUSH WITH MONEY...these days they FLAUNT their POWER IN OUR FACES.
But...be sure to Write, Phone and E-Mail your Congress Critter...so that your VOTE will be COUNTED!
A Few will LISTEN...but, it grows less and less with the growth of MONEY, MONEY, MONEY...!
I still believe we should do this...but, less and less as time goes by... sadly. I THINK we DID GOOD with SOCIAL SECURITY PUSH BACK! Over 2.5 Million. But we will need more than that number of signatures going forward...and we might be at "tipping point" where they don't give a SHIT!
Who Knows...but...it's not looking good for the "Average Person/Little Guy/Gal...the COMMON PEOPLE. If they don't even listen to the POLLING OF THE PEOPLE?
snacker
(3,619 posts)Bookmarked
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)She put her pet project, which had a bare majority of support and majority opposition among Republicans and gun owners, ahead of the much more broadly-supported background check initiative.
Who can buy a weapon in the first place is much more important than the shape of that weapon's grip.
Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)What answers you get depend a lot on what questions you ask.
If you ask about specific measures, you often get answers reflecting broad support.
But if I recall correctly - and I should stress that I may well not, I certainly can't cite a source from memory - if you ask people "do you favour tighter gun control" then you get much less encouraging answers.
And I suspect that the latter question may be the one that better reflects how the issue will influence voting patterns.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)It's somewhat mysterious why; the most common explanation is good old-fashioned ignorance.
Or, as Sorkin put it, "68% think foreign aid is too high, but only 59% think it should be reduced. Who are these other 9%? Oh, right: people who can't read."